The Non-Contentious Probate (Amendment) Rules 2025: Do they make a difference for charities?

The Non-Contentious Probate Rules ('NCPR') govern the process of obtaining grants of probate and letters of administration in England and Wales. The original legislation came out in 1987 and has been amended several times since to enable the rules to keep pace with an ever changing legal and technological landscape. In 2013, a working group was established to discuss an overhaul of the legislation, but, whilst they got as far as producing a new set of rules in draft, the anticipated overhaul never happened in the end.  The working group has, however, recently been re-established and it therefore seems that the overhaul may now be back on the horizon, and a consultation is expected soon. 

Despite the working group's intention to run a public consultation on the wider changes, some relatively minor amendments were laid out by parliament in September via a statutory instrument,  which will come into force on 3 November 2025. There was no wider consultation on this. The new legislation is known as the Non-Contentious Probate (Amendment) Rules 2025 ('NCPAR 2025'). The purpose of the amendments are to reflect modernisation and to address some matters relating to the probate process that were considered to be pressing. The NCPAR 2025 contain a few key points that will be of interest to charity legacy teams.

Change to NCPR Rule 36: Trust corporation applications must be made online

A trust corporation may apply for a grant of probate when named as executor, or for letters of administration (with will annexed) when entitled in some other capacity, e.g. as a beneficiary or as the attorney of an executor.    This is demonstrated by Foot Anstey Trust Corporation, which often takes out grants when Foot Anstey is performing estate administration work for charities.

From 3 November 2025, trust corporations will be required to submit their grant applications on the HMCTS online portal.  This has been possible for some time, but the NCPAR will make this mandatory. The new legislation outlines:   

“(A1) An application for a grant to a trust corporation must be made using the online portal.

(A2) An application made under paragraph (A1) must be made by completing and sending the online application form provided through the online portal and electronically paying the appropriate fee.

(A3) Where original documents are required to be sent in support of an application made under paragraph (A1), these must be sent separately to the registry in accordance with instructions given by the registry.”;

This legislation aims for consistency as it reflects the mandatory online process for other straightforward applications.  Importantly, whilst the legislation itself does not make a distinction between applications for grants of probate and grants of letters of administration (with will annexed), HMCTS have confirmed that this change only applies where a trust corporation is an executor and is applying for a grant of probate.  Where, as is common for charities, the trust corporation is applying for letters of administration with will annexed as a beneficiary or as attorney, then the application to the probate registry will still have to be made via the paper application route.  The Institute of Legacy Management is in regular contact with HMCTS regarding the development of the online portal to make it available to charities and other users in relation to non-executor trust corporation applications, and we understand that this is on their improvements roadmap, although the current focus is on expanding the functionality in relation to intestacies. 

Change to NCPR Rule 27: Order of priority where two or more persons are entitled in the same degree

The amendment to rule 27 introduces an order of priority when there is a dispute between two or more people who are equally entitled to apply for a grant of letters of administration.  The legislation inserts:

“(6A) In resolving a dispute between persons entitled to a grant of administration in the same degree, the district judge or registrar may apply the following order of priority, namely—

(a)the person with the support of the majority of those entitled in the same degree;

(b)of the persons entitled in the same degree, the person who first lodges an application with the registry;

(c)a neutral person agreed by the parties to the dispute;

(d)a neutral person appointed by the registry in accordance with directions.”

HMCTS have confirmed that the use of the word 'may' is intentional. Consequently, this means that the judge or registrar can depart from this order of priority if, at their discretion, they consider it right to do so in relation to the case before them.   The change could therefore be viewed as helpful guidance for judges and registrars to refer to when exercising their discretion in these situations. 

The change could, in theory, be beneficial for charities in certain situations, as demonstrated in this hypothetical example:

The deceased was an avid animal lover. The will names no executors and leaves the estate to four beneficiaries, three of which are animal charities and one is an estranged relative who is known to be unhappy about the charities' inclusion on the will. If, in this scenario, a dispute were to arise as to who should take the grant, the judge or registrar may decide to issue a grant to one of the animal charities as the applicant charity would surely have the majority support and therefore be top of the order of priority .

We look forward to seeing how this new order of priority is implemented in practice.

Other notable amendments

The above are the most applicable amendments to charities. Others include the amendment to NCPR rule 41, which allows the judge or registrar to revoke a grant where it was issued despite the "entry or receipt" of a caveat due to an official error or delay in the registry. HMCTS have commented that this change was needed due to the speed of the online process, which sometimes results in grants being issued before a caveat has been entered onto the probate registry's system.  As charities do sometimes find themselves needing to enter a caveat to protect their positions in potentially contentious probate cases, this provides helpful clarification that a caveat will be effective once received in the probate registry (as opposed to when entered on their system). 

There is also a small change to NCPR rule 4 to allow applications from Scottish solicitors and probate practitioners.  Previously, the position was that they would need an agent in England & Wales in order to extract a grant here. 

We will keep a close eye on the implementation of these changes and will also eagerly await the working group's consultation paper in relation to the wider proposed changes to the NCPR.  We will provide further updates in due course; however, if you wish to discuss in the meantime, please contact Gavin Holt or Weronika Stefaniak.